Britain Signs Security Pact With the Headchopper and #1 Funder of Global Terrorism — Saudi Arabia: Wants to Keep Pact Secret

     Prime Minister David Cameron (right) with Prince Salman bin Abdul Aziz.
Photo by Number 10.

By Oliver Wright
The British Government signed a secret security pact with Saudi Arabia and is now attempting to prevent details of the deal from being made public.

The Home Secretary Theresa May agreed to the so-called ‘memorandum of understanding’ with her Saudi counter-part Crown Prince Muhammad bin Nayef during a visit to the Kingdom last year.

The Home Office released no details of her trip at the time or announced that the deal had been signed. The only public acknowledgement was a year later in a Foreign Office report which obliquely referenced an agreement to “modernise the Ministry of the Interior”.

But now following a Freedom of Information request from the Liberal Democrats, who were in Government at the time, it has emerged that the agreement is far wider than has been acknowledged.

In its grounds for refusing to publish details of the memorandum the Home Office has admitted it “contains information relating to the UK’s security co-operation with Saudi Arabia”.

Releasing the document it says “would damage the UK’s bilateral relationship” with the Kingdom and potentially damage Britain’s national security.

Human rights groups have expressed alarm at the secretive nature of the deal with a regime which has been condemned for its human rights record.

In February the Kingdom adopted a new anti-terrorism law that defines terrorism as words or actions deemed by the authorities to be directly or indirectly “disturbing” to public order or “destabilizing the security of society.

In March, a series of decrees promulgated by the Interior Ministry extended Saudi Arabia’s extended the definition of further to include “calling for atheist thought” and “contacting any groups or individuals opposed to the Kingdom”, as well as “seeking to disrupt national unity” by calling for protests.

Read More

Brainwash The Internet: Spy Agency's Attempt to Induce Online "Conformity" and "Obedience" Exposed

Photo by Anonymous9000.

By Jon Queally
With never-before-seen documents accompanied by new reporting on Monday, The Intercept's Glenn Greenwald and Andrew Fishman are offering a more in-depth look than ever into how a secretive unit of the UK's GCHQ surveillance agency used a host of psychological methods and online subterfuge in order to manipulate the behavior of individuals and groups through the internet and other digital forms of communication.

According to the reporting, the latest documents, which were leaked to journalists by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden,

Demonstrate how the Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group (JTRIG), a unit of the signals intelligence agency Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), is involved in efforts against political groups it considers “extremist,” Islamist activity in schools, the drug trade, online fraud, and financial scams.

Though its existence was secret until last year, JTRIG quickly developed a distinctive profile in the public understanding, after documents from NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed that the unit had engaged in “dirty tricks” like deploying sexual “honey traps” designed to discredit targets, launching denial-of-service attacks to shut down internet chat rooms, pushing veiled propaganda onto social networks, and generally warping discourse online.

Among the most troubling revelations is a 42-page internal JTRIG memo that describes in detail how the elite unit developed, maintained, and apparently sought to expand its "scientific and psychological research into how human thinking and behavior can be influenced" in order to increase its ability to "manipulate public opinion" via online tools like email, social media, video, discussion forums, and other platforms.

Greenwald and Fishman argue JTRIG's self-documented exploits are most notable because of their "extensive use of propaganda methods and other online tactics of deceit and manipulation" that are not only reserved for "suspected foreign enemies" or criminals, as the agency continues to claim, but have also been used against other groups and individuals that the agency deems threatening or "politically radical."

As Common Dreams reported in February of 2014—when the existence of JTRIG was first made public—the GCHQ has used the unit to develop and deploy a complex series of "dirty tricks," "propoganda," and "false flag" operations designed to spy on selected targets who included not only "suspected terrorists" and "criminals" but also diplomats, journalists, and activists.

Included in the new JTRIG memo is this detailed look at the manipulative online tactics developed by the group:

The reporting also highlights the internal memo's focus on "manipulation" and how the GCHQ hoped to foster both "conformity" and "obedience" among those targeted:

______________

Behavioural Science Support for JTRIG’s
(Joint Threat  Research and Intelligence Group’s) Effects and Online
HUMINT Operations

Reprinted with permission from Common Dreams.

Empire and Colonialism: Rich Men in London Still Deciding Africa’s Future

Photo by A.Davey.

Some £600 million in UK aid money courtesy of the taxpayer is helping big business increase its profits in Africa via the New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition. In return for receiving aid money and corporate investment, African countries have to change their laws, making it easier for corporations to acquire farmland, control seed supplies and export produce.

By Colin Todhunter
Last year, Director of the Global Justice Now Nick Dearden said:

“It’s scandalous that UK aid money is being used to carve up Africa in the interests of big business. This is the exact opposite of what is needed, which is support to small-scale farmers and fairer distribution of land and resources to give African countries more control over their food systems. Africa can produce enough food to feed its people. The problem is that our food system is geared to the luxury tastes of the richest, not the needs of ordinary people. Here the British government is using aid money to make the problem even worse.”

Ethiopia, Ghana, Tanzania, Burkina Faso, Côte d’Ivoire, Mozambique, Nigeria, Benin, Malawi and Senegal are all involved in the New Alliance.

RELATED STORY: Corporate Land Grabbers In Northern Mozambique Are Kicking African Farmers Off of Their Lands

In a January 2015 piece in The Guardian, Dearden continued by saying that development was once regarded as a process of breaking with colonial exploitation and transferring power over resources from the ‘first’ to the ‘third world’, involving a revolutionary struggle over the world’s resources. However, the current paradigm is based on the assumption that developing countries need to adopt neo-liberal policies and that public money in the guise of aid should facilitate this. The notion of ‘development’ has become hijacked by rich corporations and the concept of poverty depoliticised and separated from structurally embedded power relations.

To see this in action, we need look no further to a conference held on Monday 23 March in London, organised by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). This secretive, invitation-only meeting with aid donors and big seed companies discussed a strategy to make it easier for these companies to sell patented seeds in Africa and thus increase corporate control of seeds.

Farmers have for generations been saving and exchanging seeds among themselves. This has allowed them a certain degree of independence and has enabled them to innovate, maintain biodiversity, adapt seeds to climatic conditions and fend off plant disease. Big seed companies with help from the Gates Foundation, the US government and other aid donors are now discussing ways to increase their market penetration of commercial seeds by displacing farmers own seed systems.

Corporate sold hybrid seeds often produce higher yields when first planted, but the second generation seeds produce low yields and unpredictable crop traits, making them unsuitable for saving and storing. As Heidi Chow from Global Justice Now rightly says, instead of saving seeds from their own crops, farmers who use hybrid seeds become completely dependent on the seed, fertiliser and pesticide companies, which can (and has) in turn result in an agrarian crisis centred on debt, environmental damage and health problems.

The London conference aimed to share findings of a report by Monitor Deloitte on developing the commercial seed sector in sub-Saharan Africa. The report recommends that in countries where farmers are using their own seed saving networks NGOs and aid donors should encourage governments to introduce intellectual property rights for seed breeders and help to persuade farmers to buy commercial, patented seeds rather than relying on their own traditional varieties. The report also suggests that governments should remove regulations so that the seed sector is opened up to the global market.

The guest list comprised corporations, development agencies and aid donors, including Syngenta, the World Bank and the Gates Foundation. It speaks volumes that not one farmer organisation was invited. Farmers have been imbued with the spirit of entrepreneurship for thousands of years. They have been “scientists, innovators, natural resource stewards, seed savers and hybridisation experts” who have increasingly been reduced to becoming recipients of technical fixes and consumers of poisonous products of a growing agricultural inputs industry. So who better than to discuss issues concerning agriculture?

But the whole point of such a conference is that the West regards African agriculture as a ‘business opportunity’, albeit wrapped up in warm-sounding notions of ‘feeding Africa’ or ‘lifting millions out of poverty’. The West’s legacy in Africa (and elsewhere) has been to plunge millions into poverty. Enforcing structural reforms to benefit big agribusiness and its unsustainable toxic GMO/petrochemical inputs represents a continuation of the neo-colonialist plundering of Africa. The US has for many decades been using agriculture as a key part of foreign policy to secure global hegemony.

Phil Bereano, food sovereignty campaigner with AGRA Watch and an Emeritus Professor at the University of Washington says:

“This is an extension of what the Gates Foundation has been doing for several years – working with the US government and agribusiness giants like Monsanto to corporatize Africa’s genetic riches for the benefit of outsiders. Don’t Bill and Melinda realize that such colonialism is no longer in fashion? It’s time to support African farmers’ self-determination.”

Bereano also shows how Western corporations only intend to cherry-pick the most profitable aspects of the food production chain, while leaving the public sector in Africa to pick up the tab for the non-profitable aspects that allow profitability further along the chain.

Giant agritech corporations with their patented seeds and associated chemical inputs are ensuring a shift away from diversified agriculture that guarantees balanced local food production, the protection of people’s livelihoods and agricultural sustainability. African agriculture is being placed in the hands of big agritech for private profit under the pretext of helping the poor. The Gates Foundation has substantial shares in Monsanto. With Monsanto’s active backingfrom the US State Department and the Gates Foundation’s links with USAID, African farmers face a formidable force.

Report after report suggests that support for conventional agriculture, agroecology and local economies is required, especially in the Global South. Instead, Western governments are supporting powerful corporations with taxpayers money whose thrust via the WTO, World Bank and IMF has been to encourage strings-attached loans, monocrop cultivation for export using corporate seeds, the restructuring of economies, the opening of economies to the vagaries of land and commodity speculation and a system of globalised trade rigged in favour of the West.

In this vision for Africa, those farmers who are regarded as having any role to play in all of this are viewed only as passive consumers of corporate seeds and agendas. The future of Africa is once again being decided by rich men in London.

Reprinted with permission from Center for Research in Globalization.

Why Britain Won’t Talk About Crucial Elements of Jihadi John’s story

The role of our security services in the actions of 'Jihadi John' needs grown up discussion - we must not forget the lessons of Northern Ireland.

"Jihadi John" with one of his beheading victims.

By Ben Hayes
In “Suspect Community: People’s Experience of the Prevention of Terrorism Acts in Britain”, professor Paddy Hillyard produced what remains the world’s most detailed ethnographic study of the impact of repressive laws and state policies on what we now call “radicalisation”. That was 1993. Hillyard, a former chair of the National Council of Civil Liberties (now Liberty), had interviewed more than 100 people of Irish catholic descent and provided unequivocal evidence that their everyday treatment at the hands of the British state had boosted support for Irish republicanism, acted as a recruiting sergeant for the IRA and fuelled “the Troubles”. Of course it wasn’t the only “radicalising” factor: Bloody Sunday, a shoot-to-kill policy and state collusion with Loyalist paramilitaries also played their part. As of course did the violence, propaganda and popularity of organisations like the IRA.

RELATED STORY: ISIS Beheader 'Jihadi John' Joined ISIS Only After Years of Harassment by British Intel — Britain Responds With PR Blitz (Video)

We could learn a lot from people like Paddy Hillyard and the incremental moves toward truth and reconciliation in the north of Ireland. Instead, this valuable insight is being steadily exorcised from public debate – as are the similar experiences of Muslim communities at the hands of the British state.

Yesterday the identity of “Jihadi John”, the ISIS executioner-in-chief, was revealed to belong to British citizen Mohammed Emwazi. The human rights group CAGE – the only organisation in Britain who offers legal support to Muslims who have been interrogated or harassed by the security services (support which is readily available to most others questioned by the UK authorities) – produced a 3,000 word dossier detailing his treatment between 2009 and 2013. This included, inter alia, the surveillance of his movements, the interception of his telecommunications, the orchestration of his arrest in Tanzania and transfer to the Netherlands where he was interrogated by MI5, attempts to coerce him into becoming an MI5 informer, harassment of his family and fiancé, and the prevention of his resettlement in Kuwait – all in the absence of any formal allegation, charge or prospect of official recourse.

Since this occurred well before Mohammed Emwazi’s departure from the UK and appearance in Syria as “Jihadi John”, one might have thought our media duty bound to ask whether this and other encounters played any part in his decision to go there. Indeed the most revealing exchange, which should surely have been on the lips of any journalist worth their salt, is the following, spoken by MI5 agent “Nick”: “Listen Mohammed: You’ve got the whole world in front of you; you’re 21 years old; you just finished Uni – why don’t you work for us?” When Mohammed declines, he is told: “You’re going to have a lot of trouble... You’re going to be known... you’re going to be followed... life will be harder for you.”

Let us be clear that whatever else may have transpired since this exchange, here is a credible allegation of state-sanctioned blackmail of one of our citizens upon pain of having his life ruined by unaccountable security forces. When things like this happen to Muslims in Arab dictatorships, we talk about “secret police” and “fearsome security apparatuses”. When they happen here, we put our fingers in our ears and demand that Muslims “get over themselves” and condemn acts of terrorism.

And so it was that Kay Burley of Sky News duly began her interview with a CAGE spokesman by asking “What level of harassment by the security services here in the United Kingdom justifies beheadings?” – a plainly preposterous straw man argument that literally no-one was making. Liberal pin-up Jon Snow also glossed over the evidence produced by CAGE, before getting down to the most important business of the day: demanding that their spokespeople condemn terrorism, and seeking to belittle them when they question why this demand is only ever made of Muslims, or worse still, refuse to participate in the ridiculous spectacle.

It was already a nailed-on certainty that the government and the media would turn the “extremist” spotlight onto CAGE and its supporters in a witch hunt that would make McCarthy blush. But having anointed Peter Oborne the Supreme Ruler of Media Integrity for taking on the Telegraph, perhaps they should ask him what he thinks about CAGE’s treatment at the hands of the establishment. Or reflect on CAGE’s founder and director’s own experience at the hands of MI5, or his three-and-a-half years of illegal detention in Guantanamo Bay and Belmarsh prisons. Nope: they’re just “apologists for terrorism”, guilty until proven innocent.

Human rights and social justice groups should be supporting CAGE in its endeavours to uncover the extra-judicial prosecution of the “war on terror” in this country. They won’t because they’re scared of the “public perception”. Much easier to support free expression from behind the comfort of a “Je Suis Charlie” banner. The country should be having a serious conversation about the way “intelligence-led policing” has undermined our national security and human rights by linking the treatment of Mohammed Emwazi to the discredited use of informants and double agents in Northern Ireland, to the links between MI5 and extremist groups, and to an undercover culture that has perverted the pursuit of social and legal justice in this country. It won’t, because we’ll turn a blind eye to anything at the drop of the T-word.

Something fundamental has to change if we’re to have the grown-up conversations that can inform these policies, and that can temper the appeal of extremism and violence in all quarters.

Reprinted with permission from openDemocracy.

Human Rights Activist By Day — Bigot By Night: Man Recorded Screaming Racist Chant Directs World Human Rights Forum

After a racist incident in which a black man was not allowed to board a train in the UK, an ex-cop apologized for his involvement — after a video exposing him surfaced.

Richard Barklie.

Ex-Cop Says Sorry Over Chelsea Racism Incident

A former policeman accused of being involved in an alleged racist incident with Chelsea football fans on the Paris Metro has apologized.

By SkyNews
Richard Barklie, who was one of three men police sought after a black man was allegedly pushed off the train by chanting football supporters, has insisted he is not a racist.

Video posted online showed commuter Souleymane Sylla being pushed back onto the platform as some of those on the train chanted "we're racist, we're racist and that's the way we like it".

Mr Barklie, 50, who was a member of the Royal Ulster Constabulary and a Police Service of Northern Ireland officer, is currently a director of the World Human Rights Forum.

The Chelsea season ticket holder issued a statement through his solicitor Kevin Winters, in which he admitted being involved in an "incident" that resulted in Mr Sylla being "unable to enter part of the train".

Read More

ISIS Beheader 'Jihadi John' Joined ISIS Only After Years of Harassment by British Intel — Britain Responds With PR Blitz (Video)

Asim Qureshi of CAGE speaks about why Mohammed Emwazi—aka "Jihadi John"—joined ISIS.

British media responds with a propaganda blitz against Britain-based Muslim organization, CAGE:

CAGE: Important human rights group or apologists for terror?

By BBC

As details emerged about the identity of "Jihadi John", the masked Islamic State militant pictured in several hostage videos, questions started to arise about Cage, the advocacy group that had been in close contact with the man now known to be called Mohammed Emwazi between 2009 and 2012.

Cage has caused controversy by suggesting that MI5 harassment could have contributed to the radicalisation of the Kuwaiti-born computer graduate who grew up in west London.

Human rights groups say they are doing "vital work" but critics have called the organisation "apologists for terror".

Cage describes itself as "an independent organisation working to empower communities impacted by the War on Terror" and has spoken out against the UK's anti-terrorism laws.

Cage said Mohammed Emwazi had sought their assistance after being interrogated by a British security official in the Netherlands following an attempted visit to Tanzania.

Prime Minister David Cameron has defended the security services amid criticism that they failed to stop Mohammed Emwazi from leaving the UK for Syria.

London Mayor Boris Johnson said accusations that the security services were at fault were "incredible".

He said: "It is beyond satire and amounts to nothing less than an apology for terror".
ord Carlile, the former independent reviewer of terror legislation for the government, said: "At the very least Cage are guilty of sloppy thinking and very unwise language.

"Before they can command any credibility from the wider community, they should make it clear that they reject the murder by ISIL of Christians and of Muslims who disagree with their views, and that they reject beheading and burning people alive.

"They should also give clear advice that joining ISIL constitutes a criminal act." 'Hypocrisy ferments extremism'

But the human rights lawyer Clive Stafford Smith defended the "vital" work of Cage and denied they are apologists for terrorism.

He said: "They do important work and the UK authorities need to understand that alienating moderate Muslims is the worst thing that could possibly be done at this time.
Read More

The Most Watched People On Earth — Offered Even More Surveillance: UK Prime Minister Wants To Ban All Encrypted Communications

Britain jumps at the opportunity to use terror attacks in France to justify more spying on everybody

David Cameron wants the UK under "total" surveillance.

By Zach Miners
The U.K. may ban online messaging services that offer encryption such as WhatsApp and Apple's iMessage, under surveillance plans laid out by Prime Minister David Cameron.

Services that allow people to communicate without providing access to their messages pose a serious challenge to law enforcement efforts to combat terrorism and other crimes, Cameron said Monday.

He didn't name specific apps, but suggested those with encryption would not jive with new surveillance legislation he's looking to enact if he gets re-elected this year. Such apps include WhatsApp, iMessage, Google Hangouts, Microsoft's Skype, CryptoCat, and more.

"In our country, do we want to allow a means of communication between people which, even in extremists ... that we cannot read?" Cameron said, adding later, "No, we must not."

"The first duty of any government is to keep our country and our people safe," he said.

Read More

Four Tips for Would Be British Immigrants — And One for Those Who Hate Them

There are some important things that people thinking about moving to Britain need to know before they come here...

Wikimedia

By Amit Singh
Immigrants are facing a tough time when they come to the United Kingdom. Everywhere they look they are seemingly unwelcome. UKIP have surged 25% in the polls and could win 128 seats in the next election, making the political landscape even more hostile to immigrants.

It must then be difficult for any prospective immigrants to know what to make of the UK. It must also be tough when deciding whether to even come to the UK at all. As such here is a brief guide (in English, as obviously you should speak English if you come to the UK) aimed at helping:

There are no British women
One of the famous myths spread by right wing parties and the right wing press is that as a male immigrant you will take British women and British jobs, leaving none left for the indigenous British male. Right wing bigots make out as if any vaguely non-white guy walking across the border will lead to a white women leaving her husband and rushing into the arms of Raj or Kwame. This advertising from the BNP et al has caused male immigrants flocking in their droves to the UK, only to be grossly disappointed on their arrival.

If you are coming to the UK as an eager sexpat. Don’t. This British women myth, is just that, a myth. There is no gross surplus of British women at the disposal of any slightly non-white looking man. Rather than finding a willing wife, you’re more likely to run into women like this on the tram (although there is arguably some sexual tension there)! In fact, as a struggling, single, brown journalist I can say first hand that this is simply not true (if you know any British women, do tweet me though!).

Stealing British jobs
‘’They took our jobs!’’ Declares any right-wing politician. You’d be forgiven then for thinking as an immigrant that you’d come to England and have your pick of all the best jobs. Just roll over the border and usurp David Cameron as the British Prime Minister or replace Wayne Rooney as Manchester United’s foremost overpaid striker. Easy. The truth though, is unfortunately not quite as sexy (which is why I’m writing this article without pay for openDemocracy- times are hard). The areas where immigrants are most likely to find jobs in the UK are in ‘low skilled’ jobs such as horticulture and food manufacturing. That push for ten Downing Street or for a place in behind Radamel Falcao at United may have to wait after all. Be prepared to start at the bottom and get shouted at for doing so. As an immigrant you’re really damned if you do, damned if you don’t. If you work then you’re stealing British jobs, if you don’t work then you’re a benefit scrounging, lazy immigrant. Try to find a balance of not taking a British job, not claiming benefits and not being lazy (I’m as confused about this as you are).

It’s incredibly cold
Before leaving home an immigrant should consider the weather. The BNP and UKIP post a lot of false advertising when it comes to immigration. They tell potential immigrants that the sun is proverbially always shining here. It isn’t. In fact, it’s incredibly cold and the autumn-winter season is now in full swing. Do you really want to leave the sunny shores of South Asia to relocate to cold, harsh London? I myself could be working on my suntan on a farm in the Punjab were it not for my grandparents migration to the UK. If you do come wrap up warm. I know that I myself am not built for these conditions. In fact sometimes I think the cold winters are a Tory conspiracy to test the resolve of us non-white Brits and force as back home (you heard it here first)!

An immigrant revolution is not imminent
With idiotic Tory MPs talking about immigrants ‘swamping’ Britain it’s easy to come to the conclusion that Britain is becoming some sort of immigrant, post-colonial society, whereby a sort of Walking Dead-esque post-apocalyptic Britain is on the horizon.

In reality though, Britain is still pretty white and still, funnily enough, pretty British (not to mention still pretty racist). If you expect to come to Britain and chill with your non-British brothers and sisters in harmony, think again! Only 11.9% of the population is actually foreign born and I hate to break it to you but according to the most recent census (2011) 87.7% of the population is still white. The revolution is unfortunately not imminent.

Advice for anti-immigrant haters
For all the rhetoric from right-wing commentators they do a terrible job of dissuading people from coming to the UK. The BNP, UKIP and the Tories make out as if immigrants will come to the UK have their pick of the jobs and of the women (and of the men), living a chilled out, care-free existence. Immigrants, they tell us, can sit around drinking Pina Coladas whilst collecting benefits. If only this were the case! What these parties should do instead is release new posters with simple logos. “Don’t come, its freezing!’’ for example. Simple, yet effective. Right now they’re simply luring in immigrants under false pretences. It’s not fair on the immigrants and it’s not fair on those good native British people who just want to express their racist views in peace!

Reprinted with permission from openDemocracy

'Let Them Drown At Sea': The UK's Answer to the Influx of Refugees — 'Death as Deterrence'

UK dropping search and rescue efforts in Mediterranean wrong and cruel approach, rights advocates say

"A Cry for Those in Peril on the Sea"  (Photo: Hellenic Coast Guard/ Photo Unit/flickr/cc)

By Andrea Germanos
The UK's announcement this week that it would not support search and rescue operations to save migrants in the Mediterranean Sea is "appalling" and an affront to human dignity, a United Nations human rights expert has said.

RELATED STORY: Surge in Migrant Deaths Predicted as Italy Ends Mediterranean Rescue Program - Saved '400 Lives a Day'

The UK's declaration came out earlier this month in a statement to Parliament but was widely reported on Tuesday.

Carrying out search and rescue missions just encourages other migrants to take the perilous journey, the government said.

"We do not support planned search and rescue operations in the Mediterranean," Joyce Anelay, minister of state for the Foreign Office, stated.

"We believe that they create an unintended 'pull factor,' encouraging more migrants to attempt the dangerous sea crossing and thereby leading to more tragic and unnecessary deaths," she said.

François Crépeau, United Nations Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants, stated Thursday that it essentially means the UK is willing to let migrants drown to serve as an ineffective migration deterrent.

"Governments that do not support the search and rescue efforts have reduced themselves to the same level as the smugglers," Crépeau stated. "They are preying on the precariousness of the migrants and asylum seekers, robbing them of their dignity and playing with their lives."

"Migrants are human beings and just like the rest of us they too have rights. They too have the right to live and thrive. To bank on the rise in the number of dead migrants to act as deterrence for future migrants and asylum seekers is appalling. It’s like saying, let them die because this is a good deterrence," he said.

"Moreover, the increasing number of persons fleeing from conflict, violence and oppression requires a new and concerted strategic approach by European States towards asylum seekers," he added.

Kate Allen, Amnesty International UK Director, also denounced the UK's dropping of supporting for search and rescue efforts, stating: "This is a very dark day for the moral standing of the UK."

"History will judge this decision as unforgivable. When the hour came, the UK turned its back on despairing people and left them to drown," Allen stated.

The International Organization for Migration estimates that 3,200 migrants have died so far this year attempting to cross the Mediterranean. In a report (pdf) issued last month, the organization states that the Mediterranean is "the deadliest sea in the world for migrants."

Reprinted with permission from Common Dreams.

America and Islamic State: Mission Creeping Toward Attack On Syrian Government??

The United States is increasing support of its Iraqi and Kurdish allies and escalating attacks on its jihadist enemies. Islamic State's long-term plan, though, remains on track.  

Isis fighters. (Screen capture from YouTube video)

By: Paul Rogers

When President Obama authorised the use of United States air-power against Islamic State (IS) forces on 7 August 2014, there were just two stated purposes: to protect refugees, especially the Yazidi, and to counter any IS move towards the Kurdish regional capital of Irbil, the argument being that it was necessary to protect US personnel based in that city.

By that time there were reported to be around 1,000 US military deployed to Iraq because of the crisis. They joined US citizens already in the country employed in diplomatic, military-training or private-security roles, though it is hard to estimate the exact number (see "Islamic State, Iraq, America: a new front", 14 August 2014).

In the first few days of the air-strikes, few targets were hit, mainly IS artillery and logistics support that was considered too close to Irbil. There was some irony in this, since much of the IS equipment was American and had been seized by IS from Iraqi army bases in and around Mosul. It was, at least, good news for US defence companies, with their weapons being used by the US navy to destroy their weapons: a truly win-win situation, profit-wise.

Until mid-August, the US purpose seemed set. The function of the US forces would remain as originally stated, but it was expected that the operation would last many weeks (perhaps months). An important part of the plan was to allow Iraq's incoming prime minister Haider al-Abadi time to construct a more inclusive government and thereby undermine Sunni support for IS.

This all changed on 15-17 August as US forces substantially increased the tempo of their airstrikes, moving to aid Iraqi special forces and Kurdish troops to retake the Mosul dam, which IS had captured on 7 August. Over these three days, thirty-five out of thirty-eight airstrikes were intended to provide this support. US Central Command announced that the fifteen attacks by 18 August had “damaged or destroyed nine ISIL fighting positions; an ISIL checkpoint; six ISIL armed vehicles; an ISIL light armored vehicle; an ISIL vehicle-mounted anti-aircraft artillery gun, and an IED emplacement belt”.

Furthermore, US air-attacks are no longer provided by navy F/A-18s flying off the aircraft carrier USS George H W Bush in the Persian Gulf. They also utilise F-15E and F-16 strike-aircraft of the US airforce (USAF) operating from land bases in the region (probably in Qatar, such as the al-Udeid air-base) as well as from Predator armed-drones. The details are sparse, not least because countries in the region do not want IS to know that they permit bases on their soil to be used for US attacks against it.

Whether or not this can be described as “mission creep”, it is certainly the case that US military action has expanded considerably in the past two weeks, especially in the past five days. There are also indications of a further planned expansion, at least from the perspective of the Pentagon—if not the White House.

The IS calculation

Into this state of flux has now been inserted another factor, the brutal killing of the US photojournalist James Foley.

From the perspective of the Islamic State leadership, the murder serves four functions. The first is to demonstrate to its own paramilitaries that it can retaliate for the many of its own men undoubtedly killed in the US airstrikes, especially those around the Mosul dam.

The second is that the choice of a killer with an English accent will focus European and especially UK attention on what is happening—witness prime minister David Cameron’s rapid return from holiday.

The third is that it will send a signal to the American public that it has supporters who come from a closely allied state, an uncomfortable element given the refusal of the UK parliament to endorse military action on Syria in August 2013. Just how reliable is Britain?

The fourth and most important is a more subtle and potentially escalatory element, again no doubt deliberate. This is that the killing of James Foley sends a clear message of the fate any members of the US military captured by IS paramilitaries are likely to receive.

Even without this danger, US air operations in contested environments typically include a substantial "extraction back-up". Thus, if airstrikes are being conducted, standard operating procedure will be to have helicopter back-up available for retrieving downed aircrew. With this particular threat from the Islamic State, it is certain that any such operation will have major support: helicopters, airborne and within range at all times, with special forces and casevac personnel onboard, and with the helicopters themselves protected by helicopter-gunships and ground-attack aircraft.

All this takes serious resources. It should therefore be assumed US forces in Iraq are being (very quietly) expanded, principally at the base at Baghdad international airport but most probably in the Kurdish region as well.

Indirectly, therefore, the appalling murder of James Foley will ensure mission creep. And this is exactly what the Islamic State wants, for nothing would suit it more than for the US involvement in Iraq to expand rapidly. This may seem strange, given that US forces have successfully enabled Iraqi and Kurdish troops to retake the Mosul dam. But the Islamic State is not interested in the short term, and is willing to take casualties if these enable it to develop the narrative of the “far enemy” back in the Islamic world and doing its worst (see "ISIL, Iraq, and intervention", 16 June 2014).

Western analysts may see current developments as a path to subduing IS and creating space for an incoming government in Baghdad to develop more inclusive governance. IS, though, is in this for the long term. Just as the murder of James Foley has been a great shock, so IS may seek to arrange attacks in countries supporting US military action. These would most likely include Qatar and Bahrain (which houses the base of the US navy’s fifth fleet), and might also involve attacks in Baghdad.

From the perspective of Washington, the situation may be still be under control, with everything going more or less according to plan. A relevant question, however, is: whose plan?

Reprinted with permission from openDemocracy.

British Quakers Urge Recognition of Palestine by United Kingdom

A statement on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict made by Quakers in Britain at their Yearly Meeting in Bath, in August.

Quakers Friars - In Broadmead, Bristol, England. (Photo by shrinkin'violet)

By OpenDemocracy

Amid faltering ceasefires and talks, Quakers in Britain are calling for urgent action on Gaza. They urge the UK Government to recognize Palestine as a nation state; they call for a comprehensive arms embargo on all sides in the conflict and for an end to Israel’s blockade of Gaza and occupation of Palestine.

The calls for action come in a statement made by the decision making body of Quakers in Britain, the Yearly Meeting, attended by 2,000 Quakers in Bath.  As part of their commitment to peacemaking, Quakers continue to challenge anti-Semitism and Islamophobia.

The Yearly Meeting heard essential steps towards full and fair negotiations:

Palestine to be recognized as a nation state

An end to indiscriminate fire by all sides

A comprehensive arms embargo

An end to Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory and blockade of Gaza

Freeing elected Palestinian leaders now held as political prisoners

The use of international law to hold all parties to account for their actions.

The Yearly Meeting heard that this week Quakers were invited to meet Foreign Office ministers on the crisis. Teresa Parker, programme manager for Israel and Palestine for Quakers in Britain, was among representatives from faith and secular agencies who went to share views and experience of the region.

A key motivation for Yearly Meeting is valuing all life. The Yearly Meeting statement says:

“As we among other Nobel Peace Laureates have said, ‘The conflict between the Palestinians and the Israelis will only be resolved when Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian territory is ended and the inherent equality, worth, and dignity of all is realised.’  Peacebuilding is a long and demanding path to take… We long for – and will work for – a time when the fear experienced on all sides is replaced by a sense of security.”

The Yearly Meeting statement in full reads:

A statement on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict made by Quakers in Britain at their Yearly Meeting in Bath, 8 August 2014

“ At this time of sombre anniversaries, as we observe the centenary of the outbreak of World War I and the anniversaries of nuclear bombs dropped on the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki we find our Quaker testimonies to peace and equality again compel us to speak out.

“The hostilities in Gaza are the latest eruption of the deep and long-running conflict between Israelis and Palestinians. Root causes of this conflict, including the structural violence of occupation, must be addressed. Such violence damages all the people of the region. The present time, with its faltering ceasefires and talks, is a time of both crisis and opportunity.  

“From our long-standing Quaker experience of working on this issue in Palestine, Israel and Britain, and from listening to the testimony of Quakers in Ramallah, we are convinced that the UK Government has a real role to play.  A starting place would be for the UK to recognise Palestine as a nation state on the same basis as it recognises Israel.  We note that 134 states have already recognised the State of Palestine. The UK Government should also play its part in creating a real opportunity for peace by drawing groups such as Hamas into the political process and thus away from violent resistance to the occupation. We have seen around the world how those once labelled as terrorists can come to be recognised for their statesmanship.   It is our view that freeing elected Palestinian leaders now held as political prisoners would help Palestine to develop as a flourishing economic, political and civil society.

“The international community remains complicit in the conflict for as long as it fails to make full use of the mechanisms provided by international law, to hold all parties to account for their actions.  Under international law, at all times, all parties should distinguish between civilians and combatants, though as Quakers we place equal value on every human life. The Israeli Government's ongoing blockade of Gaza and its apparent collective punishment of the people must end, as must indiscriminate fire by all sides.

“Amid the present crisis, we are reminded that the people of the West Bank, living under Israeli occupation face restrictions on movement; loss of land and water; demolitions; the continuing building of settlements; detention without trial and violence by settlers and the Israeli military. Such suffering often sows seeds of future violence.

“The anniversary of World War I reminds us how easily militarised societies can slide into armed conflict and become blind to the alternatives to war. At such times, the international community has a responsibility to avoid fuelling the conflict. We join others in asking for a comprehensive arms embargo on Israel, Hamas and armed Palestinian groups. Quakers in Britain ask the UK Government to take a lead on this by halting arms exports to Israel.

“As we, among other Nobel Peace Laureates, have said, 'The conflict between the Palestinians and the Israelis will only be resolved when Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian territory is ended and the inherent equality, worth, and dignity of all is realised’. Peacebuilding is a long and demanding path to take, but an essential one.

“Quakers in Britain feel called to act alongside others to address the roots of violence. We continue to uphold Quakers in the region and those working nonviolently for peace and human rights within Israel and Palestine. Quakers will continue to challenge anti-Semitism and Islamophobia, as we oppose all forms of prejudice. We long for – and will work for – a time when the deep fear experienced on all sides is replaced by security and a just peace.

Signed
Chris Skidmore
Clerk of the Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) in Britain

Quakers in Britain send human rights monitors to the West Bank, East Jerusalem, but not Gaza. On behalf of Churches Together in Britain and Ireland and other Christian agencies Quakers in Britain runs the Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Palestine and Israel (EAPPI). Ecumenical accompaniers focus global attention on Israeli and Palestinian peace and human rights groups. EAPPI uses the standards of human rights and international law to work for an end to the occupation and for a just peace with security and dignity for all.

Notes

• - 134 nations have already recognised the State of Palestine (source: Palestinian Mission UK).
• - The Nobel Peace Laureates’ statement is here http://www.quaker.org.uk/news/nobel-peace-laureates-call-real-peace-between-israelis-and-palestinians
• - The Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Palestine and Israel (EAPPI) is a World Council of Churches (WCC) initiative which was established in 2002 in response to a call made by the Heads of Churches in Jerusalem, and Palestinian and Israeli NGOs. Since August 2002, about 1,000 ecumenical accompaniers from more than 20 countries have served in Israel and Palestinian territories. More than 160 of these EAs were from Britain and Ireland. See www.quaker.org.uk/eappi
• - Quakers are known formally as the Religious Society of Friends.
• - Around 23,000 people attend 478 Quaker meetings in Britain. Their commitment to equality, justice, peace, simplicity and truth challenges them to seek positive social and legislative change.
• - At the Yearly Meeting Gathering, 2,000 Quakers, including 300 young people, have been at the University of Bath campus for a mixture of worship, business, interest groups, and significant lectures, exploring ‘What it means to be a Quaker today’. Junior Yearly Meeting, for 14 to 18 year olds, has run alongside YMG.

Reprinted with permission from openDemocracy.

How To Be A Successful 'Ethnic' in Britain: Mainstream Media Tells Minorities To Sell Out To Get Accepted

Here are five simple tips for ensuring you're a good ethnic, mostly gleamed from personal experience and a close reading of the Sun.

Flickr/didkovskaya. Some rights reserved.

By Amit Singh
David Cameron’s recent cabinet reshuffle has dominated the press. Cameron is trying to present a more ‘representative’ image as he promotes women to key positions and moves out some of his old chums in the process. What is striking though, is that prior to his reshuffle there was just one ethnic minority in cabinet, Sajid Javid, who is the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport. Despite promoting women to senior positions the majority, if not all of them, will likely be white, with BME (black, minority and ethnic) women left looking on hopelessly as power slips them by. As an ethnic woman times are tough. But for ethnic men there can be some hope. Here is a guide about how to make it to the top as an ethnic:

1) Be the biggest patriot in the room

As a non-white your credentials as a patriot will always be in question. White people will see you as not fitting in and even worse, not wanting to fit in. To get around this you need to make sure that you are the biggest patriot. At the World Cup (or any sporting event involving Britain, or during a war…) you should have a huge St Georges flag hanging outside of your house. The flag should be so big that your house can be mistaken for an English Defence League meet-up (if it is mistaken as such invite the good folk of the EDL in for a pot of tea - tea, not chai). When its Remembrance Day make sure your poppy is highly visible on your suit (and massive). Don’t let old white people think you’ve forgotten (they fought for freedom - even if Britain was running a barbaric empire at the same time… but that’s all history).

2) Distance yourself from other non-whites and non-white culture

Sajid Javid provides a great role model in this regard. His family are Muslim but he doesn’t practice and has married a Christian lady. Javid has also gone as far as to say on record that ‘’I think we should recognize that Christianity is the religion of our country.’’ Distance yourself from your own culture and cultural beliefs and reposition yourself with white Brits. You can also do this by taking right wing stances on issues. Politically speaking you should probably be a Tory because most rich white people are Tory’s. Forget Labour. Labour pretend to be progressive but let’s not forget how Gordon Brown and Tony Blair’ last Labour cabinets were incredibly white and male (what ever happened to David Lammy?).

3) Hate all immigrants

Immigrants are evil! And they are your biggest competition in the job market (aside from white people, obviously). If you really want to be a successful ethnic who makes it to the top you have to call for Britain to close those borders! This is what explains the rise of ethnic minorities supporting UKIP. Say things like ‘well we can’t let them all in can we... there just isn’t enough space.’ If you’re really bold you could even say something like ‘yeah, England just isn’t recognizable anymore, they are taking over, what happened to British values?’

New immigrants are lazy, scrounging, good for nothing Eastern Europeans and Sharia law advocating Muslims. Your type of immigrant built Britain, their type of immigrant destroyed it. As an ethnic you can come into a debate about immigration and say things that white people are simply too afraid to say! Make those bold statements about how ‘they are taking over,’ bemoan how ‘lazy’ and ‘unappreciative’ immigrants are. Talk about them not trying to fit in with the way they dress and smell and if you want to win extra brownie (or whitey) points say something like ‘they’re just scroungers, can’t they f**k off back to Bangladesh or wherever they’re from?’’

4) Make white people feel comfortable about their own ignorance and racism

If someone says something like ‘you’re brown, do you celebrate Christmas?’ or 'do you have turkey or curry?’ do not respond angrily or sarcastically. Say something like ‘well we have turkey, but I bet most of them lot have curry.’ They will love this. The biggest mistake you can make is to appear like you’re siding with your own people or with other ethnics. You have to present yourself as normal and nearly white, different to your average Sanjeev, Kwame or Suneeta. If you want to really step your game up make a racist joke or two. Let the white people know that you are down with that sort of ‘banter’. You want to give off a vibe that you wish you were white, because we all know white is right! If you’re lucky you may even be rewarded with the most coveted of remarks that you are 'alright for one of them' (whatever ‘one of them’ you may be).

5) Be Islamophobic

If you want to win the white man over you have to unite over a shared enemy. Hating immigrants isn’t enough. It’s just too vague and still leaves you open to attack. Instead that enemy is none other than the viscous Islamist who is taking over ‘our’ streets. If you’re of Muslim origin then this is even more important, you can really go to the top if you’ve now denounced Islam. White people can now justify their Islamophobia by citing your work, as an obvious expert in the field. White people love to hear ‘former’ Muslims venting about how evil Islam is. You can really score points in this field by egging white people on, letting them feel like their Islamophobia is an accurate appraisal of current social issues. Say something like ‘it’s just racist, but… they moan about life here, yet they’re happy to claim benefits and aren’t exactly quick to get on the next flight to Muslamistan.’ You try to fit in but Muslims don’t. Bond with the white man over a shared hatred and let them know that their concerns are valid and not even remotely racist or bigoted. This is what my name sake Amit Singh tried to do when he joined the EDL…

Although perhaps he took it a little too far.

(Don't join the EDL.)

Reprinted with permission from openDemocracy.

Anti-Israel Protest in London Draws 150,000: Demonstrators Demand End to 'Massacre' in Gaza and Arms Trade With Israel

Screen capture from YouTube video.

By Natasha Culzac
Thousands of people opposed to Israel’s bombardment of Gaza have taken to the streets in London in a mass demonstration to try and intensify pressure on the British government.

Arranged by a compendium of anti-war campaigners and religious organizations, the march, from the BBC’s headquarters near Oxford Circus to Hyde Park, was claimed by organizers to have had as many as 150,000 in attendance.

The Met Police told The Independent that it was entirely peaceful and no arrests were made. The force would not confirm how many people it estimated had taken part.

Protesters’ traveled past the US Embassy en route to the central London park, waving “Free Palestine” placards and flags, while chanting that the Israeli offensive is a “massacre.”

Vocal opponents of Israel’s airstrikes on the Gaza Strip, including Lib Dem MP David Ward and Labor politician Jeremy Corbyn, also took part in the protests.

The Palestine Solidarity Campaign, one of the core organizers of the event, said in a statement yesterday that it wants the march to bring a stop to UK military and industrial collaboration with Israel.

“[The demonstration] will increase the pressure on the British Government to introduce an immediate arms embargo on the State of Israel,” it said.

Read More

'Organized Child Sex Abuse' Covered Up In Britain: Law Enforcement Files Got Lost 'On an Industrial Scale'

Norman Tebbit, British politician: "People thought the establishment was to be
protected." (Screen capture 0from YouTube video)

By BBC
A former cabinet minister has said there "may well have been" a political cover-up of child sex abuse in the 1980s.

Lord Tebbit told the Andrew Marr Show the culture at the time was to protect "the establishment" rather than delving "too far" into such claims.

His comments come after it emerged that the Home Office could not locate 114 potentially relevant files.

Current MP Keith Vaz said files had been lost "on an industrial scale".

The government has rejected calls for an over-arching public inquiry into the various allegations of child abuse from that era.

However, a new review, to be carried out by a senior legal figure from outside Whitehall, will look into a Home Office review last year of any information it received in the 1980s and 1990s about organised child sex abuse.

Read More

The UK's Fastest Growing Far Right Group: Meet 'Britain First'

A child of the BNP and the EDL, Britain First has shifted the glare of bigots from race war to faith war. Meet the man behind the fastest growing far right movement in Britain, and find out what makes him tick.


By Matthew Collins
Last week, HOPE not hate released our report into the activities of the far right group Britain First (BF). It was timely; as the report was being put together - three years of margin notes and emails among colleagues detailing their growth and modus operandi, pasted together along with testimony from people close to the organisation - Britain was waking up to the news that there was a new far-right act in town, invading Mosques and running booze laden vigilante patrols in the name of Jesus in East London. The general consensus seemed to be that people viewed them as a part comedy, part evolving horror story.

A number of snap reports in the media took up the growth of this new group, the “phenomena” that is Britain First, with nearly half a million “supporters” on Facebook. It was the same old faces, mainly, with former senior figures in the diminishing British National Party (BNP) and the vanishing English Defence League (EDL), it perfectly filled the void where the panicked affliction people felt about the far right had been.

On the Streets with Far-Right Extremists Britain First

But Britain First is very, very different to the BNP and the EDL. Yes, it could be called a hybrid of the two; it’s anti-immigration and anti-Islam, it’s angry and confrontational and like the former and latter groups, a lot of what it says doesn’t really stand up to scrutiny. However, it’s leader, it’s real leader, Jim Dowson, is, as we revealed, more than just some right-wing almost comic book “crackpot”, even though he’s pint-sized and seems to be forever wearing a tweed jacket and a look that desperately begs for the lend of a monocle. He is the person we dubbed in 2008 as “the man who owns the BNP.”

Britain First is this former apprentice Calvinist Minister’s true baby. The hardline anti-abortionist had previously sat like a cuckoo in the BNP for three and a half years, amassing them enormous wealth, before attempting a crude abortion of his own by evicting the group from his office in Belfast, dumping the party with mounting and almost unfathomable debts.

Dowson was never driven by racial hatred, anti-Semitism and neo-Nazism like the BNP. He’s simply driven by fundamental extremism. We’d been inside and out of the Dowson empire for nearly seven years. We’ve traced his career through churches, courts, marching bands, tribunals, scuffles, family planning clinics, gay weddings and paramilitaries dating back some thirty years. We kept monitoring him because we knew he’d never go away.

For thirty years, the 49 year old has been attracted to anything controversial, confrontational and distasteful. As a young man in Airdrie, Scotland, in the early 1980’s he packed a bag and a bible and headed for Northern Ireland to join the protestant loyalist paramilitaries. Although not shy of violence, Dowson shied away from action in their murderous nom de plumes. Instead, he agitated and fundraised and preached the gospel from the shadows. On a fact-finding visit to Belfast in 2008, when Dowson and the BNP were just setting up shop there together, one of the most senior loyalist paramilitaries in the province politely warned us that Dowson (at the time still a relatively unconfirmed quantity to us) had “a lot of friends” in the province.

We found that his religious activities had brought Dowson considerable wealth and even a slice of “peace funding” from the European Union. He had a series of properties across Europe with various purposes and guises, from post-conflict resolution getaways for young people, to a sanctuary for young women. It was his wealth and influence that convinced the easily impressed Nick Griffin to hand over the entire running of the BNP to Dowson within a year of their meeting.

When Dowson dumped the BNP in 2010, they foolishly attempted to go to war with him. As the party was collapsing, they invented sex smears about their former fundraiser and owner. People were kidnapped, driven off the road and even went to prison as things turned bitterly nasty between the two parties. BNP leader Nick Griffin even went to court to claim, incorrectly, that the Ulster Defence Association (UDA), a murderous paramilitary group from Northern Ireland, was trying to intimidate his family over money on behalf of people linked to Dowson.

But Dowson was not after Griffin’s money, he was after his supporters. Despite all the wealth and trappings he had amassed over the years, Dowson had never had his own army. He’d flitted for years and years in search of a willing ear to listen to his prophecies, he’d nested like a cuckoo. He’d travelled to the United States to work with evangelical Christians, black and white, who shared his world view. He’d found comfort and purpose in the bitter hatred and theology of the Irish conflict, but it was in the BNP that he believed he’d realised his true potential.

One million people had voted BNP in the 2009 Euro elections and donated millions of pounds to the party and its “cause”. They weren’t neo-Nazis, they were people driven by fear and cultural insecurity, living in moral panic every time something beyond their control or comprehension broke on their television screens. Social media was in its infancy, so Dowson had driven the BNP machine forward by the use of the telephone, pressing nightly from his call centre into the homes of BNP members and supporters an evangelical message that only by donating money could the BNP save theirs and Britain’s mortal soul.

The predictable headlines our report into Britain First garnished tended to be about “race hate thugs”, though our report in reality says very little about the racism that is already obvious in Britain First. Dowson’s group is not of the simple thuggery and racism of the BNP and the EDL, though those are inherent characteristics of the organisation and they will not subside. When Dowson left the BNP he recruited a few noticeable individuals who had over time in the party, conversed with him about God. He recruited four regional organisers who had over time, converted to Christianity. He also took Paul Golding, at the time an elected councillor but a fading star in the BNP, back with him to Northern Ireland. Golding converted from a racist bigot to a religious zealot. It is no surprise to hear he attended the controversial church in Belfast of Pastor James McConnell, who two months ago sparked controversy by telling his two thousand strong congregation that Muslims were the “spawn of the devil”.

Whilst the BNP believe that a race war is imminent, Britain First believes that it is a religious war that is coming. In our report we spell this out and also expose how Dowson and Golding have upped the ante in anti-Muslim hate rhetoric, not just by invading Mosques and antagonising radical Jihadists on their doorsteps, but by building, training and drilling a uniformed mob of “Crusaders” who believe they are preparing for a civil war between Christians and Muslims of biblical proportions. Driving around in armoured cars, wearing face masks and chanting the name of “Jesus Christ”, they exhibit the very fundamentalist behaviour that they accuse sections of the Muslim community of. More than the BNP and even worse than the EDL, Britain First are likely to drive more and more people into the arms of extremists and out of the clutches of civilised society. Arrested four times this year already, Golding says nothing will stop him in his mission to “expose” Islam.

His response to our report was to issue a threat to any journalist who printed its “lies”. That, was not very Christian, at all.

Reprinted with permission from openDemocracy.